A while back I posted an admittedly silly question pertaining to how many Larrivees do you have to own or have owned to be a real Larrivee fan. At the end of that discussion I admitted that I was on the fence between a 000-40R and an Avalon A2-20 I had previously owned. At the time I was feeling nostalgic and wanted to reacquire the Avalon. I have decided against that idea. I'm not being wishy washy I just prefer a Larrivee. I have totally bought into the family, the business, and the great value of Larrivee guitars.

Here's my dilemma...I love my 000-40. It is such a great guitar and I mean everything about it but...I also want a East Indian Rosewood guitar. I'd like the 000-40R but I'm concerned it's too similar, or would be, to my 000-40. I want it to have all of the characteristics of a EIR guitar. Would the 000-40R get me there or should I be looking at an OM-40R? As a reminder, I previously owned a L-03R and found it a little too large...almost like a dread in my arms.

I welcome your suggestions. For what it's worth, I may stray into the Martin OM-21 or OM-28 world to satisfy my yearning for EIR but I would prefer staying with a Larrivee product.

I don't understand the "I want rosewood" thing. The back wood is a less significant factor than the body size, depth, and the top wood, but everyone focuses on the back wood. Instead of chasing something like that, maybe figure out what it is you like about rosewood and get a guitar that has that quality, regardless of what back wood it uses.

I don't understand the "I want rosewood" thing. The back wood is a less significant factor than the body size, depth, and the top wood, but everyone focuses on the back wood. Instead of chasing something like that, maybes figure out what it is you like about rosewood and get a guitar that has that quality, regardless of what back wood it uses.

What I don't understand is why someone would post a non-response to the question(s) asked? Why respond at all.

I don't understand the "I want rosewood" thing. The back wood is a less significant factor than the body size, depth, and the top wood, but everyone focuses on the back wood. Instead of chasing something like that, maybe figure out what it is you like about rosewood and get a guitar that has that quality, regardless of what back wood it uses.

I beg to differ. There is a sea of difference between a guitar with Rosewood back and one with Mahogany back, and all other things similar. The first one will have overtones galore whereas the second one will have far less.

I beg to differ. There is a sea of difference between a guitar with Rosewood back and one with Mahogany back, and all other things similar. The first one will have overtones galore whereas the second one will have far less.

My thoughts exactly...otherwise why make guitars with different woods for sides and backs?

I beg to differ. There is a sea of difference between a guitar with Rosewood back and one with Mahogany back, and all other things similar. The first one will have overtones galore whereas the second one will have far less.

"Sea of difference" seems extreme. The body size and the top wood must be the oceans to your sea then. I say this as someone who owned Larrivees that were identical, save for rosewood and mahogany back woods. I think players do themselves a great disservice in thinking their only choices are rosewood or mahogany back woods and they overlook greater factors like top woods, bracing, 12 fret vs 14 fret, different body sizes (going larger or smaller). Those are where your greater differences lie. I'll never again make the mistake of getting the same guitar in rosewood and mahogany.

My thoughts exactly...otherwise why make guitars with different woods for sides and backs?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

They use different woods so that buyers have options. Doesn't negate what I'm saying about other factors making a greater difference. Players seem to view their options as being rather narrow though. I'm trying to help them look outside of the box because I've found my favorite guitars by doing that.

They use different woods so that buyers have options. Doesn't negate what I'm saying about other factors making a greater difference. Players seem to view their options as being rather narrow though. I'm trying to help them look outside of the box because I've found my favorite guitars by doing that.

All well and good but I am well aware of the plethora of tone woods available and I prefer East Indian Rosewood.

A while back I posted an admittedly silly question pertaining to how many Larrivees do you have to own or have owned to be a real Larrivee fan. At the end of that discussion I admitted that I was on the fence between a 000-40R and an Avalon A2-20 I had previously owned. At the time I was feeling nostalgic and wanted to reacquire the Avalon. I have decided against that idea. I'm not being wishy washy I just prefer a Larrivee. I have totally bought into the family, the business, and the great value of Larrivee guitars.

Here's my dilemma...I love my 000-40. It is such a great guitar and I mean everything about it but...I also want a East Indian Rosewood guitar. I'd like the 000-40R but I'm concerned it's too similar, or would be, to my 000-40. I want it to have all of the characteristics of a EIR guitar. Would the 000-40R get me there or should I be looking at an OM-40R? As a reminder, I previously owned a L-03R and found it a little too large...almost like a dread in my arms.

I welcome your suggestions. For what it's worth, I may stray into the Martin OM-21 or OM-28 world to satisfy my yearning for EIR but I would prefer staying with a Larrivee product.

Thanks!

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Seems like you might have conflicting priorities and impressions of what EIR provides. You absolutely love your current guitar, but apparently there are characteristics of EIR guitar that it doesn't have. And then you have concerns that if you just bought the same model but with EIR they would be too similar. How can that be if EIR is so different from what you currently have?

I think your dilemma actually reveals a truth but that truth is in conflict with a simple desire to have a guitar with a different appearance than what you currently own. The two acoustics I own in my signature sound remarkably similar and share almost no construction, tone woods, etc. but the shape of the guitar bodies are very close to each other and strung with identical sets of strings, it's really hard to tell them apart in a double blind evaluation (I've done this when I won the Taylor). I like the pickup system in the Taylor better than the K+K in my Larry, so when I have a quick situation to plug in I lean to the Taylor, though recently I have made some external EQ setup on a Zoom G5 bypassing the amp simulation that has me using my Larry for a performance next weekend.

I've had the benefit of a double blind evaluation of my L-03 and John Standefer's L10 that he won at Winfield, and in his hands, my hog back L03 vs his blinged out L10 with Rosewood back - I could not have tell the difference acoustically.

Seems like you might have conflicting priorities and impressions of what EIR provides. You absolutely love your current guitar, but apparently there are characteristics of EIR guitar that it doesn't have. And then you have concerns that if you just bought the same model but with EIR they would be too similar. How can that be if EIR is so different from what you currently have?

I think your dilemma actually reveals a truth but that truth is in conflict with a simple desire to have a guitar with a different appearance than what you currently own. The two acoustics I own in my signature sound remarkably similar and share almost no construction, tone woods, etc. but the shape of the guitar bodies are very close to each other and strung with identical sets of strings, it's really hard to tell them apart in a double blind evaluation (I've done this when I won the Taylor). I like the pickup system in the Taylor better than the K+K in my Larry, so when I have a quick situation to plug in I lean to the Taylor, though recently I have made some external EQ setup on a Zoom G5 bypassing the amp simulation that has me using my Larry for a performance next weekend.

I've had the benefit of a double blind evaluation of my L-03 and John Standefer's L10 that he won at Winfield, and in his hands, my hog back L03 vs his blinged out L10 with Rosewood back - I could not have tell the difference acoustically.

Well, there you go. Someone needs to tell Larrivee consumers they're wasting their money buying L10s when L03s sound exactly the same. Larrivee needs to know this too because someone is getting screwed by paying more for rosewood guitars.

My point wasn't that the L-10 is a waste of money. The L-10 was absolutely stunning in appearance. But I did a real double blind evaluation and it was amazing how similar the two sounded in his hands even though my strings certainly weren't the same as his, and his action was set better than mine (he let me play it for about 10 minutes), but when he played both back to back with me standing about 5 feet in from of him, eyes closed before he picked up the first one and during the switch back and forth, it was nearly impossible to hear the difference. It was that day that one of my friends that helped me host the workshop with John, decided to buy an LO3R by the way.

When John handed my L03 back to me, he said something like "nice Guitar". It confirmed in my mind that I had something special with my Larry (which was still pretty unknown in the US at the time).

I don't understand the "I want rosewood" thing. The back wood is a less significant factor than the body size, depth, and the top wood, but everyone focuses on the back wood. Instead of chasing something like that, maybe figure out what it is you like about rosewood and get a guitar that has that quality, regardless of what back wood it uses.

Over the years, I have decided I'm a mahogany back and sides guy. A couple times I bought rosewood guitars... same body size with the same top wood (Sitka spruce), thinking they would be an upgrade. The sound was just not for me. I'll say it again, the only difference was back and side woods, and it was a very different guitar. My experience is apparently different than yours.

My point wasn't that the L-10 is a waste of money. The L-10 was absolutely stunning in appearance. But I did a real double blind evaluation and it was amazing how similar the two sounded in his hands even though my strings certainly weren't the same as his, and his action was set better than mine (he let me play it for about 10 minutes), but when he played both back to back with me standing about 5 feet in from of him, eyes closed before he picked up the first one and during the switch back and forth, it was nearly impossible to hear the difference. It was that day that one of my friends that helped me host the workshop with John, decided to buy an LO3R by the way.

When John handed my L03 back to me, he said something like "nice Guitar". It confirmed in my mind that I had something special with my Larry (which was still pretty unknown in the US at the time).

Sorry for quoting your entire response but I'm responding on an iphone at construction site while on break.

My guess, then, is the similarities in tone have more to do with both guitars being Larrivees and that, regardless of tone wood, that most Larrivees would share that tone. So, if I am seeking a different tone go with a different manufacturer? Am I picking up what you're laying down?

I have a 2014 L-03 Custom with Mahogany B&S and sitka spruce top. And, I have, as most of you know a brand new LV-10 Rosewood with Moon Spruce top.

They are like night and day. In tone, volume, and projection. The Rosewood guitar has a much more "lush", filled with more overtones, sound the across the spectrum. I am sure much of that is attributable to the difference in top material but, I have also played a 2015 L-03R side by side with my Mahogany version and the tone of the Rosewood guitar is definitely "warmer".

I love the tone of my Mahogany L-03 and will put it up against any other mahogany/sitka guitar out there as far as it's tonal qualities and balance.

That being said, the LV-10 has taken its place as my favorite guitar I have ever played, let alone, owned.

The 1977 L-35 Classical I own is also EIR B&S and it has a much warmer, more "spanish" tone than my Mahogany B&S Cordoba C9.

Going back to your original question, I'd suggest you consider a Larrivee LS - the small L body - in rosewood. Various Larrivee online dealers might have one, or you could order one. The smaller body will be comfortable, but these are very popular guitars (the LS Forum guitar - I think it was Forum Guitar III - ran over 70, maybe 80 units; the closest Forum guitar after that was around 20-25 units). There's a reason these Forum III LS guitars (made in hog or rosewood) don't come up for sale very often.

Also, in response to those saying other factors than wood type affect the tone (and I agree with them), the LS will have Larrivee's standard, balanced bracing, which will be/sound different than your 000-40 with more "Martin-esque" bracing. So even though the two guitars will be similar in size, they will likely each have a unique, different voice.

Sorry for quoting your entire response but I'm responding on an iphone at construction site while on break.

My guess, then, is the similarities in tone have more to do with both guitars being Larrivees and that, regardless of tone wood, that most Larrivees would share that tone. So, if I am seeking a different tone go with a different manufacturer? Am I picking up what you're laying down?

Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

Pretty much my point with the exception that they were both L bodies also. If you are looking for both a difference in tone and want EIR then it would be best to buy something with a pretty big difference in geometry of the body along with EIR back and sides.

An OM-40R may be your best fit. A OOO could be too large, by what you have said. An OM is very comfortable. I'm also a fan of an OM-21, since I had a superb one, that I know now I should have kept. Still an OM-40R is on my list to play, and possibly bring home someday.

edit; I re-read your first post. If you have no problem with the OOO-40 you already have, an OOO-40R may be a better fit. And it will definitely be different than a OOO-40.